Your issue of March 29 was thought provoking and left me with a sense of deep distress. In turn, it was with interest, sadness and outrage I read of two separate matters impacting my beloved village of Cotuit. The most prominently displayed matter was your first-page account of the disposal by way of granting a motion for summary judgment for the defense issued by Judge Woodlock of the Massachusetts District Court involving a complaint brought by a Cotuit Fire Department firefighter. The second matter was a letter to the editors of the Patriot by Rick Barry, the current chairman of the Cotuit Fire District Prudential Committee.

Woodlock’s judgment runs some 37 pages in length and goes to some pains to fully characterize circumstances and personalities involved in the case. There exists a possibility of an appeal to this judgment, but a reading of Woodlock’s findings is not pretty. To me, without a legal education, this action brought before the Federal District Court of Massachusetts smacks of “frivolousness.” I read the article with interest.

Rick Barry’s letter is an impassioned effort by an incumbent elected official to draw attention to the madness surrounding the governance of the Cotuit Fire District. As such it trumps, to a significant degree, the front-page article about litigation results. Barry reports he is the subject of four separate Open Meeting Law complaints and identifies the parties filing those complaints. Rick Barry is a member of the Massachusetts Bar and makes his living as an active lawyer. Could anyone seriously think Barry would intentionally flout the Open Meeting Law? When did you last read such a letter from an elected official? I read this letter with sadness.

Not mentioned is another stealth guerrilla tactic adopted by dissidents in the District. This involves State Ethics Commission complaints. One can file a complaint against an elected official anonymously. There is no cost associated with the filing of a complaint and no price paid by the complainant if the charge is subsequently determined to be unfounded.

As a former elected official and the target of a complaint, I know full well the burden of explaining one’s actions to the State Ethics Commission. I was fully retired when I ran for elected office. I thought I could give back. To me, ethics were equivalent to the values I learned from my parents. I didn’t learn ethics at school! I learned them at home and they carried me through 45 years of business.

I was thunderstruck when I received a complaint! The State Ethics Commission subsequently determined I had not done anything wrong. What do you think was the cost to me in dealing with the complaint? It was a factor in my decision to resign my position as chairman and as a member of the Cotuit Fire District Prudential Committee. I walked away from the princely sum of $1,250 annually and District-subsidized health insurance. Obviously, I was in it for the money!

Barry does not mention any State Ethics Commission complaints, but based on the OML submissions, there are likely anonymous charges being dealt with by Prudential Committee members. In many respects State Ethics Commission complaints are more pernicious than OML violations. They certainly require the same careful response as OML violations, but because you do not know the identity of your accuser, it is difficult to understand and address the motivation for the accusation.

This is all very debilitating and I am outraged it has continued unabated for more than three years. No one should have to endure such indignities. The Cotuit Fire Commissioners, at their most recent meeting, had an armed Barnstable police officer present to insure order was maintained.

Rick Barry, in his letter, seems to sense the tide is turning. I hope he is right, but in any event, I am most grateful for his sense of public service throughout this ordeal. He seems determined to see it through and for that all of Cotuit should be thankful. Laurie Hadley appears to have a similar disposition.